The country of Virodia has, until now, been barely self-sufficient in

OFFICIAL EXPLAINATION(OG^c version)

Situation: Virodia has been barely self-sufficient in both meat and grain. Recently per capita meat consumption in Virodia has been increasing. Recent increases in per capita income will probably continue, but production of grain will probably not increase. It takes several pounds of grain to produce each pound of meat.

Reasoning:What claim is most strongly supported by the given information? We are told that producing a pound
of meat requires several pounds of grain.

If (1) more meat is going to be consumed in Virodia,(2)more grain will not be produced, and (3) there is no excess grain, then Virodia will have to import meat, or import grain so it can produce more meat, or both.

A)The information given says nothing about pastureland for grazing cattle, and it provides no evidence that meat producers would be able to produce more meat per area of land by using the land for pasture than by using it for grain production. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the meat in Virodia is produced from cattle rather than from some other types of animals that are fed on grain. Given that the information suggests that there may be an increase in demand for grain, it seems unlikely that there will be a reduction in the amount of land used to produce grain.

B)The information says that per capita income is likely to increase and that greater prosperity correlates positively with greater meat consumption. It provides no reason to think that the correlation between rising income and increasing meat consumption occurs only with more rapid rises in income.

C)Nothing in the information given provides any evidence as to whether the amount of grain needed to produce a pound of meat will change.

D)The information indicates that per capita meat consumption is likely to continue to increase, which actually supports the opposite of what this answer choice states.

E)Correct. The information indicates that grain production will probably not increase. We are told however that meat consumption will increase. Meat production in Virodia requires a substantial amount of grain, and we know that Virodia produces no excess grain or meat. This indicates that Virodia will likely have to become an importer of meat, or, if not, it will have to become an importer of grain so that it will be able to produce more meat.


Pls. HIT KUDOS
_________________

Prosperity in Virodia is increasing. This goes hand in hand with increased consumption of meat. Which means even more grains are required to meet increased demand of meat. Yet increases in production of grain in Virodia is unlikely. So the grain and/or meat has to imported in to meet the increasing demands. Hence E is the answer.

The country of Virodia has, until now, been barely self-sufficient in both meat and grain. Greater prosperity there has gone hand in hand with steadily increasing per capita consumption of meat, and it takes several pounds of grain used as feed to produce one pound of meat. Per capita income is almost certain to rise further, yet increases in domestic grain production are unlikely.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the information given?


A. Some land in Virodia that is currently used for grain production will soon be turned into pastureland for grazing cattle for meat. - 'some' is EXTREME + turning the land into pastureland is OUT OF SCOPE

B. In the future, per capita income in Virodia is unlikely to increase as rapidly as it has in the past. - WEAKEN (it is weakening the conclusion)

C. In Virodia, the amount of grain it takes to produce one pound of meat is likely to increase in coming years. - WEAKEN ( it is weakening the conclusion)
D. Grain is soon likely to make up a larger proportion of the average Virodian's diet than ever before. - OUT OF SCOPE (no mention of anything related to diet)

E. Virodia is likely to become an importer of grain or meat or both. - CORRECT

The country of Virodia has, until now, been barely self-sufficient in both meat and grain. Greater prosperity there has gone hand in hand with steadily increasing per capita consumption of meat, and it takes several pounds of grain used as feed to produce one pound of meat. Per capita income is almost certain to rise further, yet increases in domestic grain production are unlikely.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the information given?


A. Some land in Virodia that is currently used for grain production will soon be turned into pastureland for grazing cattle for meat. -- No mention of this in the passage

B. In the future, per capita income in Virodia is unlikely to increase as rapidly as it has in the past. -- We can't infer about per capita income in future

C. In Virodia, the amount of grain it takes to produce one pound of meat is likely to increase in coming years. -- We can't infer about the grain to meat conversion ratio in future

D. Grain is soon likely to make up a larger proportion of the average Virodian's diet than ever before. -- "Than ever before" is strong phrase and it not indicated in the passage whatsoever

E. Virodia is likely to become an importer of grain or meat or both. -- CORRECT, since the country has been barely self-sufficient in the production of both, with increase in the per-capita income, the probability of import of grain or meat or both increases.


So, answer is E

OG 21 Explanation for the above question :

Situation Virodia has been barely self-sufficient in both meat and grain. Recently per capita meat consumption in Virodia has been increasing. Recent increases in per capita income will probably continue, but production of grain will probably not increase. It takes several pounds of grain to produce each pound of meat.

Reasoning What claim is most strongly supported by the given information? We are told that producing a pound of meat requires several pounds of grain. If (1) more meat is going to be consumed in Virodia, (2) more grain will not be produced, and (3) there is no excess grain, then Virodia will have to import meat, or import grain so it can produce more meat, or both.

Nothing in the information given provides any evidence as to whether the amount of grain needed to produce a pound of meat will change.

Experts, can someone comment on the question stems for these questions? I was under the impression that this was a strengthen question.

The country of Virodia has, until now, been barely self-sufficient in both meat and grain. Greater prosperity there has gone hand in hand with steadily increasing per capita consumption of meat, and it takes several pounds of grain used as feed to produce one pound of meat. Per capita income is almost certain to rise further, yet increases in domestic grain production are unlikely.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the information given?

A. Some land in Virodia that is currently used for grain production will soon be turned into pastureland for grazing cattle for meat.
-only tells us that pastureland will be transformed for meat, but a reduction in grain production means cows will have less to eat…
-does not give us indication that per capita income is going to rise further

B. In the future, per capita income in Virodia is unlikely to increase as rapidly as it has in the past.
-weakens argument

C. In Virodia, the amount of grain it takes to produce one pound of meat is likely to increase in coming years.
-weakens argument

D. Grain is soon likely to make up a larger proportion of the average Virodian's diet than ever before.
-no…we can’t infer this…domestic grain production is likely to drop; not clear how much of that would be supplemented from elsewhere

E. Virodia is likely to become an importer of grain or meat or both.
-Correct…per capita consumption of meat is increasing and to date they’ve been barely self-sufficient in obtaining it
-if per capita income is near certain to rise further, then we got to get that meat from somewhere…
_________________

For strengthen questions, we need a conclusion. This argument has no conclusion but a bunch of informational sentences. This is 1st hint.
Secondly, the meaning of question: Which of the following is most strongly supported by the information given? If it were strenghten question, the wording would have been : which of the following, if true, supports < something= conclusion> ?

hello,
I was going to mark E as my answer but I changed as I thought if meat consumption is going to increase then grain consumption will decrease which can be used in the production of meat and everything would be balanced. not that any other answer looks relevant but this one also seems quite illogical.

ANSWER CHOICE ANALYSIS -

A) Irrelevant to the argument
B) Challenging the premise in the argument
C) Can't be concluded from the argument
D) Irrelevant
E) CORRECT - If the increase in grain production is unlikely, then Virodia would need to import both the meat and grains

What we have to notice about this question is that, even though the stem uses the word "strongly," the stem indicates that we need the choice that "is most strongly supported by the information given."

In other words, we need a conclusion, and in fact, this question is a Conclusion question, which by the way, is not the same as an Inference question.

A Conclusion question is basically a Strengthen question reversed.

Whereas a Strengthen question correct answer supports the conclusion in the passage, in a Conclusion question, the passage provides support for the correct answer.
_________________

The key thing we have to notice is this detail in the passage, "it takes several pounds of grain used as feed to produce one pound of meat."

That information indicates that, even if people eat less grain as they eat more meat, if they consume the same amount of food in terms of pounds of food per person, every pound of meat they eat will take multiple pounds of grain to produce.

For instance, if a person used to eat 1 pound of meat per week and 6 pounds of grain, for a total of 7 pounds of food, now maybe the same person eats 2 pound of meat and 5 pounds of grain. However, although that person is not eating any more pounds of food in total, still 7, more grain gets consumed, because the production of that extra pound of meat takes "several pounds of grain."

In fact, even if the person goes from 1 pound of meat and 6 pounds of grain to two pounds of meat and 3 pounds of grain, STILL more grain will be consumed if it take "several" pounds of grain to produce the additional pound of meat.

In that situation, it's reasonable to conclude that they will have to start importing if they are eating more meat.
_________________

hello MartyTargetTestPrep
can you please explain why B is wrong?

Posted from my mobile device

Here's (B).

(B) In the future, per capita income in Virodia is unlikely to increase as rapidly as it has in the past.

Since this is a Conclusion question, the correct answer will be supported by or follow logically from what the passage says.

The only information the passage provides about the future is the following:

Per capita income is almost certain to rise further.

Increases in domestic grain production are unlikely.

We can also presume given what the passage say that meat consumption will likely increase in the future.

None of those facts or presumptions indicates anything about the rate of increase in per capita income (without our making up some kind of convoluted story, such as, for instance, that meat consumption will result in heart attacks and thus cause a reduction in the rate of increase of per capita income).

So, (B) is not supported by what the passage says.
_________________

Hi Experts,
VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep
I took an extreme case.
What if population decreases and meat consumption is same. Per capita consumption will still likely to increase in the future. But in this case, we don't need extra grain because meat consumption is same. In this case, we can't conclude E.
How to discard this case through passage?

Thanks!

Hi Sneha 2021.

Notice what the question stem asks:

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the information given?

Does the "information given" say anything about a population decrease? No.

Do we have a common sense reason to believe that there will be population decrease? No.

So, really we have no reason to believe that there will be a population decrease.

Thus, since the correct answer must be the one that is "most strongly supported by the information given," (E) is the best choice.
_________________

The argument needs to support the correct option. We cannot take cases that the argument does not mention. All we know is that per capita consumption of meat increases with per capita income increase. Since per capita income will rise further, we can expect an increase in per capita consumption of meat. If the country cannot produce it, it is likely to be imported.
Since the argument mentions no change in population, we can assume that it doesn't change.
_________________

Hi MartyTargetTestPrep

Based on the above information, how is option D incorrect. If the per capita consumption of meat per pound increases, indirectly the consumption of grains will also increase.

Thanks

Here's choice (D).

D. Grain is soon likely to make up a larger proportion of the average Virodian's diet than ever before.

Notice that choice (D) is not about the total consumption, or use, of grain in Virodia. Rather, choice (D) is specifically about the proportion of "the average Virodian's diet" made up by grain.

So, so the fact that, by consuming meant, Virodians will indirectly cause more grain to be used for the production of meat does not support (D), because (D) is about only the direct consumption of grain as part of their diet by Virodians.
_________________

Hi MartyTargetTestPrep @VeritasKarishma

Can you explain why A is out of scope?

If an increase in prod. of grain is highly unlikey but the demand for meat is going to go up in virodia, the grain land being turned into pastures for cattle for meat should be the next likely step for Virodia right? Which therefore is supported by the info provided.

Or are we saying that because the info provided clearly mentions Virodia to be barely self- sufficient, we are assuming that it can't take this step.

TIA!